Terminology (Re: Piotr-)

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Michael J Smith wrote:

> Are you using the term proto-Germanic synonymously with proto-Indo
> European? Because you seem to be saying that all IE languages came
> from Proto-Germanic

No, he does not use these two terms ansynonyms and he did not say
that all IE languages came from Proto-Germanic. You asked:

>>> Why is the 1st Germanic sound shift so essential in defining
>>> Germanic as distinct from proto-Germanic? [...]

... and Piotr answered:

>> [the 1st Germanic sound shift distinguishes] Not Germanic from
>> proto-Germanic, [...]

... as you implicitly claimed with your question...

>> [...] but pre-Germanic (and the whole rest of IE) from
>> Proto-Germanic and its descendants (including the historically
>> known Germanic languages).

... that is: the distinction operates _before_ Proto-Germanic
not _after_ Proto-Germanic. Thus, Proto-Germanic (and subsequently
deriving languages) form a class apart with respect to what was
before it (Pre-Germanic) and other languages not having been
subjected to this sound shift (the whole rest of IE -- before, as
well as after this sound shift).

>> By definition, Proto-Germanic is the _most recent_ common ancestor
>> of all the documented Germanic languages (e.g. Wulfila's Gothic,
>> Old Norse, English, German, etc.). As such, it represents the
>> stage postdating (and reflecting) all the common Germanic
>> innovations [...]

Cheers,
Marius Iacomi